” He’s a fraud, a frontman for the status quo.”
Yep, no doubt Obama is a front-man for the status-quo. The elites who back and vetted him, will be quite happy with his re-election. The moderates in the Republican party( Gary Johnson, Buddy Roemer) are the folks you never hear from. They have both been excluded for a reason. The powers that be know Obama could be challenged at the pols by these moderate candidates, and they’ll have none of it. Buddy Roemer takes no pac money, and is right there with Ron Paul with regards to foreign policy. Tax and trade policy changes are high on his agenda, both badly needed, but, are taboos in the day to day discussions in the media. Until ALL candidates are included in the Republican “debates”, I’ll continue to believe Obama has already been re-appointed by the 1%ers.

Posted by: ben | Dec 28 2011 15:00 utc | 4

Voters who like Paul’s foreign policy but not his domestic policy ideas should realize that, while it’s not in the constitution, a U.S. president enjoys much more latitude in implementing foreign policy than he does in domestic policy, where there are many more checks and balances. That’s just the way it is. Anyhow, it won’t get that far as b indicates, unfortunately.
Personally, I don’t intend to vote, again, just as I and 38% of the electorate chose in the least presidential. It only encourages them.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Dec 28 2011 15:10 utc | 6

I’ve been a hardcore Ron Paul supporter since early 2007. I like nearly all his ideas. I do think the Federal reserve is a criminal banking cartel, as are other central banks. I do think civil liberties will soon be gone if he doesn’t win. Of course his foreign policy ideas are wonderful and what attracted me to him in the first place. I do think there needs to be a social safety net, so that is one area of disagreement, but even Paul recognizes the need to protect medicare and social security.
Can he win? In a fair election he would win in a landslide. In the election that we will actually have? It’s more tricky, but there are a lot more of us this time and we are watching them.
I’m glad to see b support him. Angry Arab seems to hate the man, and that was the last straw for me. I’ve always liked his blog and style, but he is starting to really piss me off.
To all US citizens reading this blog: Please consider registering to vote, as republicans if necessary, to vote for Paul in your state’s caucus/primary. I understand and respect the arguments against legitimating the system. Normally I agree with them. But please. Just this once.

Posted by: Lysander | Dec 28 2011 15:27 utc | 8

“Ron Paul’s libertarian ideas on social issues and financial matters are, in my view, quite nutty” I wish you were more specific. I might agree with your statement, I might argue it. I agree that the benefits of fiat currency and the 1930’s reforms created the most stable economy the world has ever seen. On “social issues” you’ve painted with too broad a brush. I suspect we agree that a safety net is needed, (Hayek supported national healthcare) but, I see social issues like drugs and prostitution, even abortion as challenges of prohibition and thus not wise to actively prohibit. A feckless law against these things wouldn’t bother me, it’s the vast effort and resources that we dedicate to fight these inevitable problems.
I’ve voted for Ron Paul the last two presidential elections. Remember, it was Perot that gave us a balanced budget, it was the socialists who gave us social security–Ron Paul, even with a failed candidacy can challenge US imperialism, our drug war and some of the senseless bi-partisan policies that waste so much of our resources.

Posted by: scottindallas | Dec 28 2011 15:45 utc | 10

In my opinion the only way to draw attention to bogus presidential “elections” is to refrain from voting. If the percentage voting in the presidential drops from 62% to less than 50% then the chances for electoral reform are significantly increased. So don’t vote — it only encourages them.
There are much better election schemes out there, with proportional scoring etc. Other countries do it, allowing people to vote for someone who nearly represents their views (think of it), but we have to go through this bogus “election” every four years, holding our noses and choosing from tweedledum and tweedledee, or our vote “doesn’t count.” I’m sick of it.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Dec 28 2011 16:08 utc | 12

In Arkansas we have an open primary. So I will for the first time ever vote Republican, Ron Paul, in the primary. I will probably vote Green or Socialist in November. What I will not do is waste much time on the election scene this year. OWS or other participatory agitations are much more rewarding. Even in sit and spin mode… which is the only mode federal elections have.
Never imagined I would vote for a anti-choice person or the gold standard, but Paul is the only one I agree with on a few important issues (mentioned above).
I think the Democrats have played a very dangerous “Chicago” game by not allowing even ridiculous challengers in their primary. A lot of Dems should cross over and help the Republicans nominate Paul this year. But Dems are the largest group of snobby pearl-clutchers in the world.. so they will skip this opportunity. At least O and Bain must be banking on this heavily. I also think the GOP is playing hard fascist ball with election rigging/shenanigans now more than ever all around the country. While Dems, as always, say and do nothing.

Posted by: Eureka Springs | Dec 28 2011 17:19 utc | 14

It’s all just Kabuki Theater at this point, and piss poor Kabuki, at that. Do you really think that someone who holds some of the views Ron Paul holds would actually be allowed to determine the destinies of some of the most powerful people the planet has ever witnessed? Seriously? Come on, this is insane. You’re not going to elect your way out of this. There’s only one way out, if you want out, aside from suicide. We all know what it is, and its likelihood is improbable as witnessed by people still believing they’re somehow represented in elections.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | Dec 28 2011 20:23 utc | 16

Morocco Bama # 16,
No they wont allow Paul to win. But if he gathers enough support, they will have to expose themselves in order to stop him. It will make things much more clear for a lot more people. It will set the stage for the sort of things you are alluding to. That is the reason to support him. Even if you know the system will defend itself at any and all cost, then at least make it cost them something.

Posted by: Lysander | Dec 28 2011 21:34 utc | 18

I think b is right in terms of that Overton Window idea, which now is widening the allowed parameters of public discourse. What’s good for the country is the airing of debate about the secret business of the FED; and also the way that the shadow economy both profits from criminal activity and funds the War on Drugs. It raises consciousness in the country, when we discuss the way in which the Bill of Rights has been neutered by the Patriot Act, and subsequent transfers of raw, as well as clandestine power, to the executive. Real mainstream debate clarifies what Chalmers Johnson called “blowback” and the “sorrows of empire” and the absurdity of any empire’s ambition to rule the world.
The smear effort is on against Ron Paul now ; and republicans, for reasons that are obvious, want to diminish the range Paul’s political megaphone, for the same reasons that democrats fought tooth and nail after 2000 to keep Ralph Nader off the ballot. Chris Hedges was writing stump speeches for Nader; and the ideas that really matter are the ones the two main parties want to suppress, and drown out, with the carnival barkers of mainstream US politics. The main strategy is that the carnival and circus of the absurd captures center stage.
If there is truly a political poisoned chalice it is Barack Obama, the most accomplished poser we have seen in US politics since Reagan;–and frankly much more sinister than Reagan. And Ron Paul is being painted as the nutty, laissez faire capitalist, and a racist too, who will deliver us to some kind of Mad Max version of the Gilded Age. He recently walked off stage from a CNN interview, where he could see Gloria Borger was about to ambush him on Israel. He is opposing foreign aid, foreign aid to any country; so this would cut off the military dole to the dubious right wing figures in that country. Next the pols will clobber him with that sacred cow, and say he is anti-Semitic or at least not best friends with the people we love best.
There is something surreal about the political class in the West, and this is not just an American phenomenon. OK, Ron Paul is something of a political poisoned chalice in his own right; but we can watch his crusade play out, pulling into his mainstream the last numbers of Americans who believe the electoral system can stop the bleeding, and most particularly can stop the wars.
Of course, as an American, disapproval of Congressman Paul can be considered as evidence of cynicism. But the only cynicism that can top that one, is approval given to President Obama, and the thought of him coasting into another term of office on the political downfall of the candidate Americans have decided is deranged. If people think Barak Obama represents a safe consensus figure; and is indeed a centrist republican; then he is a pretty sneaky one. If Americans think he is the safe choice, after an open debate that exposes many of the sorrows and crimes of the empire,–does that mean that Americans are all in, for empire? The boosters and rank and file pols have already chosen.

Posted by: Copeland | Dec 28 2011 23:25 utc | 20

@Don Bacon:
Yes, it is true that other countries have proportional representation systems. Countries like Germany, which is a vassal of the USA, and meekly sends troops to kill innocent people whenever the Elected Emperor commands. Which goes on bended to knee to ask if the Omni-Benevolent One will remove his nuclear weapons from their “sovereign territory” and when he say “No! Who the fuck do you think is in charge here?“, never mentions it again.
Many other countries, that cooperate with the USA in doing great evil around the world, have such systems, too.
So, I think you will find that the limits to the evil a government does are not set by the form of electoral system it is elected under. They are set by (A) the power available to that government, and (B) the apathy of the people who elected it.
Of the two, the second is critical.

Posted by: ScuzzaMan | Dec 29 2011 0:21 utc | 22

I’m telling everyone I can to vote for Paul in the primary as a way to keep open a discussion of Paul’s stands on foreign policy and civil liberties. As a registered Democrat I plan to switch registration and vote for Paul in the primary. Quite simply, Democrats are allowing no choices this year.
Paul is the only way to keep a substantive debate on issues of war and peace and civil liberties alive. We need to keep him in it as long as possible.
As for the general election, I vehemently disagree with Bacon and Morocco Bama. NOT voting will be counted as a victory by those engaged in voter suppression.
Much better is to vote for a third party–any third party–to provide a measure of dissatisfaction with the ruling duopoly and of their illegitimacy.
When you look at Obama’s record, it’s hard to imagine that someone with his reprehensible decisions could even be considered the lesser of two evils.
We need to wean the Democratic base off the notion that they are voting strategically (lesser of two evils), when they consistently voting for someone who will betray them. The record provides compelling and substantial evidence that both Clinton and Obama acted directly against the interests of those who elected them, constantly appeasing Big Oil, Wall Street and the military.
I plan to write a commentary for local news papers outlining my reasoning as to why Obama should not be considered the lesser of two evils. I expect it will be published.
Instead of voting strategically, Democrats need to start voting their values. In the general election, that means third party–Justice, Green, or Socialist. If we could get those who energized Obama’s victory to support a single third party, the results could be eye popping.

Posted by: JohnH | Dec 29 2011 0:57 utc | 24

The American electoral process, now that privately-owned machines determine the winners and losers, is a shell game! You guyz talking about your votes and how they can be used to send a message to the Powers That Be have lost your minds!
American Votes aren’t counted. Your votes are manipulated, ignored, trashed, altered…blah, blah, blah, blah…they are certainly not counted.
Your vote means NOTHING except what the Powers That Be want it to mean.
…But if you actually got together and agreed to have two people with dissimilar political viewpoints with a single click counter standing outside each voting station to ask people who they voted for and then counted up the votes yourselves…..well that might lead to something constructive…Eventually…
Hey! There’s an assignment for all those kids who like hanging out in parks humming “Kumbaya” or its modern equivalent while Banksters drive by giving them the bird. Let’s give them something PRODUCTIVE to do.
Ron Paul will never be elected. He’s just another right wing side show freak in the pornographic and Satanic Freak Show “Amerika Votes” – just like Dennis Kucinich is on the “left” side of the aisle that you walk down after you lays down your electoral money, honey.
It’s all an evil fraud designed by tricky dicksters, financed by vengeful sociopaths who hate you and believed in only by ignorant children and idiots.
Geez!

Posted by: arthurdecco | Dec 29 2011 2:01 utc | 26

Ah, Egypt — isn’t that where the military council, on its U.S. leash, is still in control, violence continues, and the military has proclaimed that the Islamists who won the election will never exercise power? Don’t occupy voting booths — spread the word.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Dec 29 2011 3:20 utc | 28

I’ve been catching hell at my local blog for using Ron Paul as a way to leverage certain topics into more prominent consideration. I’m probably going to vote for him, despite some serious misgivings.

Posted by: lizard | Dec 29 2011 3:50 utc | 30

I wrote #26 a while ago.
I’m proud of it. I laid it out. Brutal. Truthful and bare. Then over the next almost two hours four people commented.
About drivel. Maybe it’s a fast news night with a million stories competing for attention…and they all just got distracted from what’s REALLY important about this election cycle!
I’m not familiar with the comments and thinking of AlethoNews and lizard but I am familiar with the commenting style of DonBacon and JohnH from my days as an irritant on the site controlled by that star-fucking sycophant of POWER, Steve Clemons.
They never shut up there either and hardly ever made a point worth deeply considering.
Nothing’s changed.It’s the sound of their own voice that entrances them.
Will this truthful post get me banned?
I earnestly hope not. There are too many voices I would miss who share their thoughts here.

Posted by: arthurdecco | Dec 29 2011 4:45 utc | 32

Whether an American still thinks there is a point to voting is a subjective judgment; and people are not idiots just because they still think it’s OK to vote. Apathy, cynicism, cowardice, are the most potent enemies of democracy.
arthurdecco takes a cheap shot at Kucinich, who is one of the few decent men we have left in public life.

Posted by: Copeland | Dec 29 2011 5:32 utc | 34

I (among many others) went through this Overton Window anti-war thing with Howard Dean eight years ago. Dean was the one anti-war candidate, so from me (and others) came contributions (masterfully orchestrated by Joe Trippi) and hand-typed letters to Iowa caucus candidates. It seemed so possible at the time. But then in Iowa they hanged Dean with the “Dean Scream,” a made-up killer for the Dean campaign. That was it.
So I can imagine that the PTB will want to play out a similar strategy on Paul. Make him “fringy” and outside the Overton Window of acceptability by decent folks.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Dec 29 2011 6:15 utc | 36

Thanks Aletho News for that link.
It’s seems that Paul removed the microphone and disengaged gradually as Borger kept digging at the issue of the 20 year old newsletters. With the quick jab about Israel right at the end.
Cheating and stealing ballot boxes is nothing new in American history; but it is typically effective in close races because of how our Electoral College system works. I would say that the flurry of activity in Obama’s Justice Department, to invalidate state laws designed to disenfranchise marginal voters (the very poor) is evidence that Team Obama thinks this is going to be a close election. Vote caging, voter challenges, letters of disinformation that get ill-informed voters disqualified as elections draw near, and voter ID laws that impact the very poor, are republican specialties. And the Obama folks at Justice are starting to clamp down on these practices, because it looks to them like the republicans will be using these methods wherever they can.

Posted by: Copeland | Dec 29 2011 6:24 utc | 38

@Don Bacon:
Perhaps my point was not clear enough.
If the government you elect does evil, no matter how it was elected, then the method of election doesn’t matter.
(I am pretty sure you weren’t complaining that there isn’t an evil enough politician to represent your views. … pretty sure.)
The fact is that George Carlin got it exactly right. They dont give a fuck about you, including your views.
Your views will only get representation when they’re afraid of not taking account of your views.
As of today, they aint.

Posted by: ScuzzaMan | Dec 29 2011 8:51 utc | 40

thanks Annie, I was wondering if that was you. yeah, the montana blogosphere is an interesting place. I’ve been writing for that blog for over a year now, and my disgust over Obama’s continuation of Bush’s third term is definitely not appreciated by Dem loyalists. our senate race between Jon Tester (D, sorta) and Denny Rehberg (R) is going to be super nasty, mostly because Jon won with around 3,000 votes in 2006, and he has since worked very hard to distance himself from environmentalists and other segments of his base, by pushing a forest bill that his republican predecessor has been working on, helping to kill the Dream Act, and militarizing our northern border from that very dangerous threat posed to us from Canada.
there is a good chance people like me will get blamed if Jon loses his race, because we point this kind of stuff out. oh yeah, we also have Max Baucus as our other senator–you know, the guy who was a driving force in selling out Americans in the health care debate. I’m hoping that piece of shit goes down in 2016–that is, if WWIII isn’t in full swing by then, and dissident poets like me aren’t deep-holed in some internment camp. good times.

Posted by: lizard | Dec 29 2011 12:55 utc | 42

@arthurdecco #32:
People read what you’re posting. They don’t always respond, especially if they don’t disagree with any particular point you’ve raised. Hell, I am barely responded to directly myself.
Raise your points and don’t expect an echo chamber. Folk here aren’t big on attaboys.

Posted by: Monolycus | Dec 29 2011 15:04 utc | 44

arthur, if you would like some feedback to your little rant that voting is worthless and we’re all idiots for discussing what to do with our vote, well, here it is: if voting was totally worthless, which at the national level it sometimes appears to be, then why are there efforts to attack voting rights?
I participate in local elections, where they still very much matter. the 2010 tea party take over had a direct affect on my state’s politics. if we didn’t have a democrat as governor, the asshat teaparty folks would have turned away nearly 100 million dollars in federal funding for critical services for the elderly and poor, like meals on wheels. I work in social services, so I see every day the struggles people at the bottom of the social ladder are experiencing.

Posted by: lizard | Dec 29 2011 15:21 utc | 46

Let me regurgitate the obvious to everyone here: corporate money is what put Obama into power. So there is no way in hell that Obama will use any of his unchecked powers that he has given himself to help overturn a very pro-corporate Supreme Court decision like Citizens United.
It hurts me to my very core to say this, but any president that gives himself even more power to further concentrate police-state powers into the hands of the select few, as Obama has done with regards to the indefinite detention bill, has no intentions whatsoever of taking Citizens United and weaken it in terms of its ability to allow American corporations to wield excessive power over ordinary Americans. He is no different from any other politician who’s thoroughly beholden to corporate America, in that he will always choose to support “They, the Corporations” over “We, the People.”

Posted by: Cynthia | Dec 29 2011 16:43 utc | 48

@Cynthia — Exactly correct on neoliberalism. Obama, the DLC and most Dems don’t quarrel with the strategies, only the means. “We’re smarter and we do it better.” But they still do it.
On Obama,
Black Agenda Report, May 7, 2008
Running to the Right: Barack Obama and the DLC Strategy

DLC endorsement is the gold standard of political reliability for Wall Street, Big Energy, Big Pharma, insurance, the airlines and more. Though candidates normally undergo extensive questioning and interviews before DLC endorsement, Obama insisted the blessing of these corporate special interests had been bestowed on him without these formalities and without his advance knowledge, and formally disassociated himself from the DLC. But like Hillary Clinton, and every front running Democrat since Michale Dukakis in 1988, Barack Obama’s campaign has adopted the classic right wing DLC strategy.
[snip]
When he does speak, it won’t be good news. Republicans are sure to escalate their demands, insisting that Barack Obama denounce a list of black and progressive organizations, activities, beliefs and individuals to retain his share of their base. And as long as Obama is wedded to the DLC strategy, he will eagerly comply.
If there was an actual mass-based progressive movement in the US, operating on the ground and independent of political parties and campaigns, it might have a prayer of holding Barack Obama accountable. But there isn’t.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Dec 29 2011 17:08 utc | 50

b, do you consider blockquotes (snippets) stealing?
i completely agree with you about being ripped off for this whole post. it’s unethical and everyone knows you are not supposed to do that.

Posted by: annie | Dec 29 2011 19:20 utc | 52

@annie – do you consider blockquotes (snippets) stealing?
Of course not. I use them myself and always link the source. But Aletho News copies whole pieces and without any obvious link back to the source. That is totally uncreative juvenile behavior. I do not want to be associated with that.

Posted by: b | Dec 29 2011 20:05 utc | 54

Arthur, I love your post, and in fact, it’s pretty much what I have asserted in this thread before you posted. Did you read my two posts upstream? Do you agree?

Posted by: Morocco Bama | Dec 29 2011 21:06 utc | 56

Morocco Bama, was that before or after you ridiculed folks for wishing each other a bit of holiday cheer?

Posted by: lizard | Dec 30 2011 0:56 utc | 58

@59 I am sure your essence is pure, unsullied. stand firm, never falter, stay true.

Posted by: lizard | Dec 30 2011 2:43 utc | 60

Ron Paul speaking out against SOPA and internet censorship.
Connecting the dots…
Iowa GOP moves vote count to secret location, making sure that anyone but Ron Paul will be declared winner.
System 99 People 0
annie @ 39, yeah, one of the best videos illustrating what western military invasions and occupations really boil down to. If the shoe would be on the other foot most of those dipshits who are branding Iraqi and Afghani resistance fighters as terrorist would be fighting any troops invading the US just as ferociously. Actually, thinking about it, most of them would be either too fat or too cowardly to muster the courage, or both.

Posted by: Juan Moment | Dec 30 2011 5:10 utc | 62

“silence is a reaction” posted by annie
annie, can I use this hook/thought of yours in a song I’m writing?
Seriously. It’s brilliant and it fits in the groove like it was made for it.
I’ll need your legal details eventually…if you want to get paid for it, that is. LMAO! tho we can figure that stuff out later.
…So – can I use it? (I’m grinning like a 5 year old who has been given an ice cream cone for no reason…)

Posted by: arthurdecco | Dec 30 2011 6:04 utc | 64

@64, Simon and Garfunkel beat you to it. But you can always create a new twist.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoKcz_3aZUQ&feature=related

Posted by: Morocco Bama | Dec 30 2011 13:31 utc | 66

The whole system has to go – and checking out isn’t really a good response.
I agree….and that’s why I wouldn’t label my stance as “checking out.” Yes, my rhetoric implies, more explicitly than implicitly, that the whole system is a charade…a joke even, but that’s not to discount its malevolence. If it’s a joke, it’s a cruel and dangerous joke with incredibly destructive ramifications for all of Humanity. So, my stance is not to marginalize it, as much as it is to give it no reverence and to not participate in it to the extent that that is possible because to do so lends it more legitimacy and thus more nourishment for the Beast that it is.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | Dec 30 2011 14:44 utc | 68

to not participate in it to the extent that that is possible
@69, your engagement is not sincere, but rather duplicitous, and it’s one of the reasons I made my comment on the Merry Christmas thread. I don’t accept false notions of good will and cheer from people with big shiny smiles and a thousand depleted uranium daggers hidden behind their back, metaphorically speaking.
You ignored a very important part of my post….the line in italics above. What part of it do you not understand? I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt. I know you’re a bright enough fella, and I know you read it, but you decided to overlook it because it wasn’t good material for the Strawman you erected.
This System is compulsory for those who occupy its lower rungs within the Hierarchy, so there is the matter of voluntary versus involuntary and that is where the “to the extent that that is possible” comes into play. However, even if you must comply with the System involuntarily, to the minimum that it’s possible, it’s imperative that we all cognitively validate and accept the nature of that mechanism rather than delusionally believing that working within the System will somehow rid us of the System. It’s a spectrum of compliance and those that voluntarily maintain the legitimacy of the System, whilst criticizing it, do a disservice to the prospects of true and meaningful change. Obviously, those who Cheerlead the System are deserved of a special metaphorical hell and brainwashing is no excuse.
With that said, I offer you a bit of belated Christmas cheer and good will. Consider world events when this show was created and aired in 1972. As innocent Vietnamese peasants were being burned alive with Agent Orange (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=or06hqP_lMg&feature=related), Lawrence Welk and Company were perpetuating the charade.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RF6yKbm_xYk

Posted by: Morocco Bama | Dec 30 2011 15:26 utc | 70

arthurdecco #64, i believe it has been copyrighted already. i stole it from the devil. 😉
#70 your engagement is not sincere, but rather duplicitous
without too much review (life is short) it is my recollection there was a rant, not much response, a request for response, a statement made response is required for creativity or something, responses were forthcoming, and now there is a lecture wrt the inadequacy of the response.
sheesh! pass the popcorn

Posted by: annie | Dec 30 2011 16:56 utc | 72

working at a homeless shelter for the last three years has shown me just how broken “the system” is. veterans, mentally ill, alcoholics, all crammed into an inadequate old house that’s falling apart around us.
for the entire time I’ve been there, we’ve been trying to rebuild/relocate the shelter. what it has taken to finally get us to the point of securing land has been collaboration, with the downtown association, the business improvement district, law enforcement, other social service providers, city council members, the mayor, and community members.
doing the work I do also means I’m not always around the safest people. I’ve had to take an order of protection out because a mentally ill women has been sending me deranged letters for a year, and started talking about my wife and kids. I rely on the courts and law enforcement to serve and enforce that order.
I’m not ready to stock up on firearms and prepare for Mad Max quite yet. I’m going to work in my community, to improve what little I can, and I’m going to get to know the people who are closer to the levers of the system than I am, because when the shit goes down, I do want to be ready.

Posted by: lizard | Dec 30 2011 18:18 utc | 74

So I can use it, annie? lol (re: 64, 72)

Posted by: arthurdecco | Dec 31 2011 4:05 utc | 76

“@64, Simon and Garfunkel beat you to it. But you can always create a new twist. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoKcz_3aZUQ&feature=related Posted by: Morocco Bama”
Thanks so much for your link, Morocco Bama! This singer is capital ‘T’ talented and the song of course is perfect ART.
You can be assured that I am creating ‘a new twist’. Just read out loud annie’s words: ‘silence is a reaction’…
Do her words even begin to scan like anything written by Paul Simon?
Uh uh. Don’t think so.
I’m working on something more brutal than these admirable 60’s sentiments even if what I’m doing is still melodic.
annie’s words work for me in the musical language of 2012. And that’s the year I’m living in. I lived thru 1968. I’m past that.

Posted by: arthurdecco | Dec 31 2011 4:52 utc | 78

Yeah, I lived through 1968 as well, Arthur, but since I liken us to trees, it’s part of me now, and you, in one of the inner rings. Yes, we’re in the process of creating a new outer ring, but that new outer ring creation will be influenced in some way by the totality of experiences that have led to the creation of all our rings.
And to that point, yes, that’s one reason it appears impossible to create a new System….because the old System has scattered an eternity of seeds ubiquitously across our psyches so that when the old System collapses, and it will, in its ashes, like a Phoenix, it sprouts again from the seeds it strategically distributed. Getting past this eternally perpetuating mechanism will be a significant milestone in social evolution. It seems impossible at this moment, but I believe that’s just the seeds of the old System talking.
Considering what I just said, and reviewing some of the more recent comments, for any one with an OPEN mind, who’s really the apathetic and cynical ones?
On the road today, as I do on occasion, I listened to the latest filth the so-called “conservatives” were dishing out, so I tuned into Rush Limbaugh, although it wasn’t Rush yesterday, but instead Walter E. Williams and his guest, Thomas Sowell. There is some truth in some of what they say, but it’s mixed with half-truths and out right lies with the intention of misdirecting people to the wrong conclusions and pointing people toward their wealth producing ideology.
Sowell said that “some people are in the business of being offended.” It’s a profound statement, and a poignant one. That’s how I see it, as well, but I apply it equally, objectively and judiciously, because just as many on the fabricated “right” are in the business of being offended, there’s an equal number on the fabricated “left” who are in the business of being offended. Apparently, some here were offended by some of my recent comments because they personalized my statements aimed at no individual in particular, and that is emblematic of “being in the business of being offended.” If you’re in the business of being offended, then the charge of “killing conversation” should be leveled against you, not at someone who says something you don’t like, or with whom you don’t agree.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | Dec 31 2011 14:08 utc | 80

Hey, Lizard. Speaking for myself, I was on the frontlines against these criminal sacks of shit while you were languishing in your daddy’s ball sack. So have a little respect for your elders, will ya?

Posted by: PissedOffAmerican | Dec 31 2011 15:12 utc | 82

respecting elders, that sounds like old system thinking to me, and I’m being told by an elder that the whole thing has got to go.

Posted by: lizard | Dec 31 2011 15:30 utc | 84

lizard,
I went over to take a look at your local blog a couple of days ago, clicked down on one of the posts and read your poem Transient. Man what a grand poem it is. I am in awe that you are writing so expertly, with such grace. You should not delay in mailing that one out to one, or several, of the poetry journals.
I’d like to post at my blog with link to you and proper attribution, with your permission.

Posted by: Copeland | Dec 31 2011 16:50 utc | 86

Also linked inn the open thread but fits better here. Greenwald: Progressives and the Ron Paul fallacies

Posted by: b | Dec 31 2011 17:41 utc | 88

@89 do you vote in local elections, or do you think all civic engagement is a waste of time? and if you think all voting is a waste of time, what are your adult suggestions we do about our broken political system?

Posted by: lizard | Jan 2 2012 3:35 utc | 90

“…..my generation will have to figure out how to adapt to the slow motion collapse your generation was incapable of addressing”
See now, I have no doubt thats what many of you WILL do. Adapt. Rather than fight it, rather than seeking to change it, you will simply roll with the punches, blame the former generation, and masturbate yourself with whatever new little electronic gadget jumps out of China.
Something you aren’t considering, Lizard. These upcoming pieces of shit like Bachman, Perry, Santorum, Obama, etc, aren’t of my generation. They’re youngsters. And they’re slimier than some of the political dinosaurs ever dreamed of being. You got your work cut out for you. Might think about that next time one of these career criminals looks you in the eye and tells you that little black box is countin’ your vote.

Posted by: PissedOffAmerican | Jan 2 2012 15:32 utc | 92

If 347,000,000 Americans turned their back on your political charade and just walked away
but you know that is not possible. it can never be. and since that is very much impossible for so many reasons it is of little use as a solution. some are giving lizard a hard time but he at least seems to be doing something about the current state of affairs in his town. and that is the most important thing to do in my opinion. all politics are local. get decent people elected in your town and they will then have a voice in getting other decent people elected to higher government.
I do agree that it makes little difference in the presidential race who you vote for but by not voting you make it easier for the ptb to install their own pet. it is already costing a billion dollars to elect a president…why make it easier and cheaper for them?

Posted by: dan of steele | Jan 2 2012 19:46 utc | 94

It saddens my heart.
Insults, name calling, putdowns, invective, petty egos longing for importance and recognition and all we’re left with is self degeneration into Horizontal Hostility!
Thanks for being the adult among us b; but letting the children stray so far?
Anyone have anything else constructive to offer on why Ron Paul should win the primaries?

Posted by: juannie | Jan 2 2012 22:09 utc | 96

OK, lizard. OK.
I give up.
Get back to me when that 1 ton chip on your shoulder falls off…and in the mean time – take some reading comprehension courses, will ya – you nasty piece of work. They may help you to understand simple, concise English sentences and lessen your need to puff out your chicken hawk chest and screech out at what and who you don’t understand.
Knowledge is Power.
You haven’t forgotten you’re a product of the American Educational System, have you, lizard?
I’d like to ask the same rhetorical question of Dan of Steel too…and I have another one I’d like an answer to, if you’re both willing:
Who taught you fellows how to read, provided you with your vocabulary and definitions for the 500 or so words you know the approximate meaning of?
I ask because you should be clamouring for your money back.

Posted by: arthurdecco | Jan 2 2012 22:56 utc | 98

Ron Paul on Iran

Posted by: Juan Moment | Jan 2 2012 23:12 utc | 100